"bigotry based on gender" what does this mean?

[Whisp]

This is the TOS language used to supposedly cover sexism and misogyny here on DU.

I was thinking about this and what it means to Me - is that bigotry toward women is the same as bigotry toward men - that's what that means to me. The infamous 'both sides do it' schtick.

And that is not right, it is way way off track wrong to say men and women have to confront the same kinds of bigoted views.

I wasn't sure whether I should post this here - if anyone requests it I will delete this as I don't know if I should be dragging things from ATA to here.

Confusing times.

[redqueen]

1. I agree with you.

But the sloppy use of language has resulted in many people actually believing that the words 'sex' and 'gender' are interchangeable.

Just like misogyny is something that is apart from sexism. But most people conflate those terms as well.

Another frequently misunderstood idea - sexism and racism do not work both ways. Bias, sure. Prejudice, of course. But not the oppression which is based on systemic, institutionalized inequality.

[DURHAM D]

2. clueless here...

[seabeyond]

24. TOS has bogotry of gender. not sexism

Skinner said in new forum ATA the no bogotry of gender is saying no sexism.

[DURHAM D]

37. Hi sea - My comment was meant to convey

that the words in the TOS have no meaning.

On December 2, 2012 at 7:31 pm I posted this -http://www.democraticunderground.com/12565203#post56



My signature line is the bottom line.

[seabeyond]

39. lol. it was very late. and i was on my little fire.

i was surprised you did not know what was going on. i should have known.

my bad

[Skittles]

29. you want I should kick your clueless ass, DURHAM D?

LEMME AT YOU!

[DURHAM D]

38. Hey skit -

I am clued in.

My ass is not the one that needs kicking.

[BainsBane]

3. It means

men need special protection, particularly white men. To mention the fact that someone might be a white male is the worst form of sexism and racism imaginable, while we should just relax if someone calls us a "bitch," "fat assed," or uses racial slurs to refer to an African American. That's what it seems to mean, at least in terms of how it is applied.

[sufrommich]

4. It is the " both sides do it" schtick.

As long as the admins here not only minimize those very real concerns and worse,make light of them along with others,I don't see any real enlightenment coming anytime soon. I was sorry to see your treatment in ATA,it was uncalled for.

[Whisp]

5. thanks, sufrommich

for yours and others support on that.

I do appreciate the sentiment but I have to say that seeing and going through so many things women must throughout their journey in life, some admin on a chat board isn't likely to shame or intimidate me.


I am a bit late in understanding that particular wording in ToS, I know there have been discussions about how it should be changed but I have to confess I just didn't get it, until just today. duh.

It is slippery wording, no doubt at all.

[sufrommich]

6. Good,we can't afford to be intimidated.

[BainsBane]

7. Another interesting response

was to the questions posed by Ms. Toad. I would have given you both a thousand thumbs up if I could have answered. I chose not to weigh in on the subject in ATA because my transparency page, which certainly would have been fodder, would have distracted from the issue. Alas, I'm a tainted woman.

[Whisp]

8. Now I feel constipated.

I was about to do a wee snark on the 'thumbs up' you mentioned, but stopped myself.

[sufrommich]

9. "Alas, I'm a tainted woman"

Lol.

[BainsBane]

11. Yes, a scarlet . . .

is it T for transparency, or is it a B?

[seabeyond]

26. ha ha. nt

[seabeyond]

25. good to hear, whisp. nt

[Ms. Toad]

21. I would have gotten around to raising the issues in my ATA posts eventually -

I've been raising the same set of issues since DU3 was in beta (although I can't prove it now that Meta was wiped out ) but it was Skinner's response to Whisp that prompted me to raise the issues again now, rather than later.

The tone of his response caught me off guard. I didn't necessarily expect him to jump in with a sudden awareness, but I also didn't expect him to drag out things which it is not easy for any ordinary member of DU to find, in what seems like sending a message that there may be a price associated with making such suggestions.

Although there are things he could toss out against me (and I half expected him to) they are much more harder to frame in a single sentence - so I figured I might as well jump in while the issue was hot. Speaking of which, I wonder what it says that our two threads are the two highest viewed threads in ATA.

[BainsBane]

22. the message was clear

and I see it exactly as you have interpreted it. Thank for your comments there. I couldn't agree more.

[Ms. Toad]

34. You're welcome. n/t

[seabeyond]

27. it was good reading your post also. nt

[Ms. Toad]

35. Thanks.

It is a bit odd posting in ATA and seeing the views climb mostly without feedback other than from Skinner, who disagrees with me, or the half dozen or so atta-boy threads that were started in response. So I am grateful for those who dropped me a DU mail or commented here.

[seabeyond]

40. ya.

that whole atta boy alone shows the hypocrisy of the conversation. another "learning" opportunity for skinner, but instead, a simple thanks. he could have used those moments to confirm and instill the belief that sexism on du is unacceptable.

and it wasnt

[sufrommich]

32. Your ability to communicate our concerns

helps us all. Well done in ATA.

[Ms. Toad]

33. Thank -

Not that it made any immediate difference - but as Skinner says, education is a good thing

[MadrasT]

10. IMO, that is a statement

that could only be made by someone who believes that women have already achieved full equality.

The responses to you, boston bean, and Ms. Toad were disappointing.

If he doesn't believe it will make a difference, why resist adding it to the TOS? (Why NOT add it? What is the harm in explicitly adding it, if you don't think it matters?)

Disappointing.

[Sheldon Cooper]

13. Yes indeed.

A statement that women don't need any special protection, sexism is so over, and anyway men have it just as bad so stop worrying about it.

[ismnotwasm]

12. I just went and read the whole thing

It's a big tent, with room for opinions, but sexism is not specified, probably because too many people who are entitled/enablers/misogynists can't define it.

The slightly more specific examples seem to address anti-Semitism and homophobia.

[BainsBane]

14. did you notice the high fives?

that Ms. Toad commented on? Or was it BostonBean or Whisp?

[wildflower]

15. I'm dismayed by that too

As well as their general treatment.

I thought Skinner's point about education - that no one was educated when posts were deleted on DU2, but much more education is happening now - was an interesting one that I hadn't considered. Yet I still felt bothered, so I took some time to think about it.

I think what is bothering me isn't so much whether posts are hidden or unhidden, but the general attitude I'm feeling; I think Ms. Toad put it as the site being unwelcoming to us.

I know I'm not around much but wanted you all to know I'm with you in how you're feeling.

[BainsBane]

16. I wanted to ask about

the people who refuse to become educated and are annoyed that anyone even tries.

Thanks for your solidarity.

[MadrasT]

17. Oh, you mean the "How dare you tell me what to think" folks?

Yeah, that's always fun.

I have seen people on DU get very hostile about being "educated".

[BainsBane]

18. I've even heard them specifically say

They resent when people try to educate them. They use the very words "educate."

[MadrasT]

19. Yup.

I guess maybe the idea is non-participants reading the posts might be educated along the way, even if the person who is arguing with you is resisting and generally being a horse's ass. (I believe half the time the people arguing are moles and trolls anyway.)

I have learned a lot from threads I never participated in.

[seabeyond]

28. that is the real bother. skinner insists we speak up and educate. then we are beat up for botherin

Quite a quandary he set up for all of us to experience and re experience. The obvious. The ugly in meta was us continually being called out for "educating". And we get the blame there also.

[Ms. Toad]

30. I agree, in principle, that education is the best tool -

And I spend a lot of time (both here and in real life) doing just that. I am in a position where I can afford to be out, most of the time, as a lesbian, rape survivor, and other things not particularly relevant to this discussion.

But that is a role I, personally, accept because I can, and because I believe it will make places welcoming and inclusive more quickly than if I remain silent. It is not one which should ever be imposed on a minority group as the price for having a space which is welcoming and inclusive.

[DURHAM D]

36. I saw your ATA OP and thought this is really GREAT...

You are a good writer, always patient, and I have watched you successfully educate posters on minority issues over the years.

You clearly illustrated that the problem with the current setup requires the victim/minority to extract (beg for) their rights from the majority.

Then I read the response. He simply changed the subject to censorship.



I did the only thing a girl can do - I read parts of the Federalist Papers and thought about the failures of our educational system.

[Ms. Toad]

43. Thanks.

I have the resources, so it is a role I take on whenever I can. I'm grateful for the feedback that it sometimes seems to be successful.

I suspect he is done responding, but I made one final attempt yesterday that it was not a matter of either/or, but a matter of finding a way to shift educational weight to other shoulders so our shoulders aren't bearing both burdens.

[seabeyond]

41. and this is another point. i get so many comments, pms telling me thanks for speaking out

many times i do not want to. so fuckin tired of it. but i know there are many women so fuckin tired of it or other reasons they will not speak out. or reasons a man will not speak out. and they are so relieved when SOMEONE steps forward and calls it.

[ismnotwasm]

20. Yes

Pure dumbass.

[seabeyond]

23. that is exsctly what it is saying. nullifying the issue of misogyny. we are all in the same boat.

Further, those advocating the use of sexist slurs has pointed out TOS lacks sexism so administration was not suggesting sexist slurs are wrong. When having the discussions in meta we were running into men pointing that out.

Even though skinner said in ATA that sexism is wrong, is covered and should not be used, the men advocating use of sexist slurs are applauding the one post on censorship, high fiving, and ignoring everything else skinner said.

Then skinner States how clear it is sexism is not allowed.

No. None of this makes sense.

[seabeyond]

42. guys being guys, that is all. why are you wanting to ruin their fun.

the more i think of the stupid milf the more pissed i get. these little pimply ass boys looking at a grown woman and in their squeaky voice stating they would fuck that woman. i mean... talk about stupid. even give our little boys the domination of our grown woman.

nothing offensive there.


the thing, is it is a joke. you are suppose to look at it so closely. you are not suppose to look at it beyond the surface and see the offense. that is where we are going wrong.

[seabeyond]

55. sorry JT. feminism forum is monitored heavily and alerted on often.... anything said, copied and

pasted, discussion of feminism, you certainly take you chances.

[BainsBane]

61. How on earth could that have been hidden?

[seabeyond]

62. probably every post on this thread has been alerted on. inevitable a jury is gonna get a hide, with

the right mix.

[BainsBane]

65. some people

Need something far more productive to do with their time. Good grief.

[DURHAM D]

68. Exactly and to help prove your point that every

post in HofF is being alerted on... I received a PM yesterday from a jury member on this post by JTFrog -

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1255&pid=17340

The jury allowed it to stand by a vote of 3 - 3.

Here is the "Alert" -

"Calling ATA, Skinner, et al the good ole boys club? This makes DU suck and I don't know why this poster would even want to be here if they feel that way."

Here are the jury comments -

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: The post was rude and absolutely off base.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Take a chill pill, alerter. Skinner says no censorship.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: Alerts like this make DU suck.
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: You know what makes DU suck? Alerts like this one. Whichever of the obsessed creeps from Meta you are, do everyone a favour and trash the feminist groups at DU so you don't get the urge to send any more stupid alerts.
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Hope JT is around to read this.

[Whisp]

66. amazing, isn't it?

Be careful what you say, and think.

Just be all around careful, everywhere. all the fucking time.

[redqueen]

67. We bring it all on ourselves, really.

We're just asking for it.

Women know how to push buttons, you know.



(Yes, this kind of crap has been posted at DU, with respect to domestic abuse, posts worthy of being hidden, etc.)

[seabeyond]

44. i read today he isnt opposed to sexism/misogyny in the TOS. he doesnt think it will be a magic cure.

that some of us may think it is. he is right. it will not stop, it will not prevent the men that KNOW it is offensive and post it to OFFEND. that is their purpose. education wont work. they already know what they are doing. tos wont stop them, they know it is only a possible hide.

BUT... the important part is TOO have the language in TOS so it show the importance on du, whether it be effective or not.

someone else can better explain and example in history of having a verbal rule and the effects on the whole.

[Whisp]

45. he might want to try it out anyway, and change the ToS.

seeing as he himself admitted that his meta experiment was a total failure, perhaps he might not be correct on this too.

I agree that if this is changed it will not solve much, but maybe it might help, a bit. We won't know if it isn't tried.

But at least it would be an outreached hand to attempt to help, and that goes a long, long, way. - not an outreached hand to slap us down like it looks now.

That annoys me more than anything, the Attitude like we were little kids asking for a second ice cream cone or something.

[BainsBane]

46. exactly, we can site it

It an alert or post to draw attention to the fact a certain behavior violates TOS. I wish he would also specify using sexist and racial slurs are prohibited, since they seems to be too much of it around. And no, I don't mean the word white, FFS. I can't believe when posters accused someone of being racist and sexist when they mention someone or a group of people might be white men.

[Little Star]

47. I have been waiting for Gormy (don't think she's around yet today) to answer him on that and

ask him to please include sexism/misogyny in the TOS seeing that he is not opposed to it.

If she doesn't ask him directly in that thread I'm considering asking him myself. What do you guys think? I like and respect Skinner a lot but I think he needs to either say a direct yes I will add it or a no I won't add it. We deserve that much least that, right?

[Whisp]

48. boston bean had an ATA question on that

and by how I understood Skinners' answer, it sounded like a 'no' to me.... he said he 'could', not 'would'.

but I don't know now, maybe I read it completely wrong and he is willing to change the TOS to what bb asked.

[Little Star]

54. I didn't read BB's answer from Skinner as a no....

It was a vague answer much the same as he gave Gormy I think.

[seabeyond]

56. i saw it as vague also. i like skinner also. i see a lot of skinner that has stood with minorities

and we discuss the issues that leave us puzzled.

putting out different messages, being purposely vague, makes it a challenge for us to understand.

in RL, i get a lot of the shit. cant "communicate" and i am suppose to figure everything out with guesses. at least give me some hints.

[Little Star]

60. That's why he should be asked to answer if he will...

add sexism/misogyny in the TOS seeing that he is not opposed to it. It's a yes I will or no I won't question and deserves a yes I will or no I won't answer. I think all of us deserve at least that. Am I wrong or is that asking to much?

[DURHAM D]

52. The TOS needs to be changed but

the only thing that will really matter is if the admin state that they have a ZERO TOLERANCE for sexist posts. They clearly stated a ZERO TOLERANCE policy for homophobic posts and have repeatedly removed posters who didn't get it.

Sometimes the admin had to be reminded of their own ZERO TOLERANCE policy. I served on MIRT for six months and during that time I kept a record of the number of posters banned by the admin because of the policy on homophobia. I also kept a record of the number of posters removed for sexist posts by the admin. The ratio was about 4 (homophobs) to 1 (sexist). Plus the number of sexist posts on DU were several times greater than homophobic posters so the effective ratio of removed posters would seem to run more like 500 to 1.

Even more importantly, while I was serving on MIRT the clearly articulated ZERO TOLERANCE policy on homophobia and transphobia from the admin was used by MIRT to remove new posters who made homophobic and transphobic remarks. There is no such tool for MIRT to use regarding the low posting sexists.

Perhaps this is the rub. Maybe the admin think that too many new posters will be PPRed by MIRT for their sexist posts if they articulate a ZERO TOLERANCE policy regarding sexism.

[seabeyond]

57. noticed and you are right on all the points. also i noticed, with homophobic OPs,

routinely hosts found ways to lock the threads when jury allowed them to stand, which i supported. YET, on the sexist OPs reasons are found to leave sexist OPS open when they clearly violate SOP rule.

that hypocrisy was most troubling for me.

[Little Star]

72. I just want to add....

that the ZERO TOLERANCE policy for homophobic posts was a long, nasty, very hard fought for battle. The LGBT community lost many good DU-members before they won that battle. And to this day, homophobia can still slip right on by, here on DU even with that Zero Tolerance policy in place.

I've watched good people like William769 throwing his hands up in frustration at some things that were allowed to stand on this site.

It's not easy to be a/any minority on this board many times and that sucks!

[seabeyond]

73. i can name three that have walked. nt

[DURHAM D]

75. Just so you know -

I am a member of the LGBT community and I am way to familiar with the Gay Purge, which was mostly lesbians and their female allies. Few of those good women returned and of those that did return most have left again.

I know that William has fought many a good battle, particularly in MIRT.

I think you will agree that the ZERO TOLERANCE policy has been a big help and a good tool for use in MIRT with regard to homophobic posters. It is not perfect but I have seen it used effectively multiple times. Women (and their allies) should have the same tool to fight sexism.

[Little Star]

77. I agree with every thing you have said in this whole thread. I...

was just trying to point out that the obstacles we feminists have to fight may be just as difficult as those that caused the Gay Purge.

Yes, the ZERO TOLERANCE policy has been a big help in regard to homophobic posters and we feminists need one too.

[Whisp]

76. I have some memories of that battle.

And I have to apologize for not being on the right side of it back then.

This is one of the things I have learned, that if I can't understand how or why a minority feels strongly about something, then I should at least shut up and listen until I do have a better understanding. I was then looking at the whole thing more as a political thing rather than a human one and I was wrong.

[Little Star]

79. Well I have an admission of my own about that...

I kept my opinions to myself instead of speaking up. I was to afraid of being banned. Shame on me because I deserve it.

[redqueen]

80. I was on the wrong side too. Out of plumb ignorance.

I also only looked at the political side, and I made no effort to learn. Embarrassing shit.

I was also on the other side of many feminist issues than I am now.

[MadrasT]

81. I wasn't involved in that at all.

But I was on the wrong side of a lot of feminist issues then.

Like, the totally non-feminist side.

[BainsBane]

82. What prompted your change?

And how have you changed, if you don't mind my asking?

[MadrasT]

83. Short answer: DU feminists.

Everything they wrote annoyed the crap out of me.

Usually when I am annoyed it means I have some introspection to do.

I introspected, and I realized I was cheerleading the patriarchy (and trash talking women) as a method of self-preservation and to get male approval. (Not so much on DU as in real life.)

I don't give a crap about male approval anymore and I have learned the meaning of "sisterhood".

Honestly I was a pretty bad misogynist before.

(Message to DU feminists - don't give up... once in a while you reach somebody like me who sees the world through a whole new set of eyes.)

[BainsBane]

84. many don't have that capacity for introspection

That's an impressive quality. I haven't always been a feminist. Growing up poor, I focused much more on class than gender. But I was never one of those women who disliked other women. I have always found that an exceedingly annoying characteristic. For example, you're with a group of people and you can see one woman spends her time flirting with men while simultaneously being rude to other women, particularly if a man disagrees with something one of the other women says. Cannot stand it.

[MadrasT]

86. Yep. That was me.

[gollygee]

89. I'm not sure if I'm right about this

But I seem to remember someone from here (HOF) made the argument that sexism was indeed prohibited by TOS because of the "discrimination due to gender" wording, and someone argued that sexism is not against TOS because that phrase is about gender identity and only applies to people who are transgendered. (Transgendered people of course also should not face bigoted language here, but sadly also do, such as with jokes about Ann Coulter.)

Did I imagine that conversation? I'm sure I remember that.

[DURHAM D]

90. I am not sure who said what about what and where and why but

it doesn't really matter at this point. The TOS is confusing and open to interpretation.

It can easily be fixed in about 1 minute if they could just find the time...

[seabeyond]

91. i know that at the beginning i was optimistic. BB i believe, started a thread asking if the TOS

should be worded stronger. i wanted it to be enough, i hoped it would be enough. i was wrong.

[redqueen]

49. Does anyone think the 'just educate them' method will work?

I know it has worked for some, but for years now feminists have been saying STOP FOCUSING ANTI RAPE MESSAGES AT WOMEN and yet still with the 'word lawyering' shit in GD.

Is this just a case of REALLY fucking slow learners, trolls, or what?

The latest 'but WHYYYYYYY?' thread has me feeling fucking sick to my stomach. Bigtime.

[Whisp]

50. I'm not sure that can be done now.

Now that Skinner has told us to stfu, there seems to be an extra bounce in some steps here last couple days, like the post you are referring to, hasn't there?

Any possibility of education kind of went out of the window when the boss doesn't even take some of our grievances and requests seriously but gets defensive and insulting instead.

I imagine there is high fiving and celebrations in certain camps. Yah, one for our team!

sickened.

[redqueen]

51. An extra bounce in some steps, yes. Good way of putting it.

The high fiving shit ... I don't know how those merited responses at all. They seemed to me to be nothing but more meta-ish bullcrap.

Interesting dynamics at play, indeed.

[seabeyond]

59. logically then, per skinners comment to educate, our responsibility to "educate" skinner is a must.

from what i see.

and at his DEMAND that we educate him.

i am thinkin'

[Whisp]

63. I like that idea. You be the 'good' educator and I'll be the 'bad'

ha. I have a bit of trouble with 'be nice and then you might get some candy' dealy.

[seabeyond]

69. ya really think i know how the fuck to play the fuckin' sugar role, lol lol lol

thanks for the laugh.

they beat me DOWWWwwwwwwwN

i dont have it in me.

now.

[DURHAM D]

53. It is not

the posters who need educating.

[seabeyond]

58. the men that use are educated to the fact what sexist is, how to use it as a weapon against women

and that is the purpose and intent of usage.

i am constantly amazed that grown ups actually argue the oppressed are not to be offended by the oppressor purposely putting out something offensive.

what fuckin' logical sense does that make.

[redqueen]

64. But FREEEEEEDUMB!

And TEEEVEEEEEEEE!

And context, but NOT how you mean it, only how I mean it!

And word meanings CHAAAAAANGE! But only ONE way when it comes to words that offend wimminz! For gays and the learning disabled, we go the other way, BUT THAT'S DIFFERENT!

[seabeyond]

71. bottom line. teh stupid. nt

[ismnotwasm]

88. I've decided to blame it on the teen movies of the 80's

'Weird Science' 'Revenge of the Nerds' 'Porkys' the excretable "Lcense to Drive"

There is no other explanation for that much stupid.

[uppityperson]

70. I do not see it as "all bigotry is the same" but that " all bigotry is bad / wrong"

Rather than trying to specify each type of bigotry, naming each and every category of people, I see it more as saying bigotry is wrong no matter the category. I also do not think trying to compare bigotry against A or B is going to get anyone very far. This is not to say there is no difference as of course different groups or categories experience widely varying types and amounts of bigotry, but all bigotry is wrong and should be hidden, imo.

[Whisp]

74. I think boston bean explained it well here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1259373

2. Thank you. I know I and many others would truly appreciate it if the terms were added.

There is a difference:

Gender Bias:
unequal treatment in employment opportunity (such as promotion, pay, benefits and privileges), and expectations due to attitudes based on the sex of an employee or group of employees. Gender bias can be a legitimate basis for a lawsuit under anti-discrimination statutes.

Sexism: Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.

Misogyny: The hatred of women by men: "struggling against thinly disguised misogyny".

There is no explicit protection for women in the TOS as it stand now.

[Little Star]

78. ^^^^^

[Sheldon Cooper]

85. Once again, all of you women (and our male allies) have my admiration.

You have way more patience than I do, and that's a good thing.

[Little Star]

87. Backatcha Sheldon

[Whisp]

92. I was thinking about all this last night

What with the republicans and their ultra craziness in regards to women and their health choices, the bizarre crazy world of legitimate rape and all that so over the top stuff it should land on Mars by now... such deeply crazy shit coming from them, that will affect everyone in every family if they get their way and they are getting their way. And the rape stories we keep hearing, where the last one is even more horrific than the one before (Stuebenville, when I think of that one I want to just burst out in tears). These past few months have been a freaking nightmare in those regards. Shock after shock keeps coming in.

And we have to have more added to that shitpile by some people here on DU? The prodding and niggling and goading... over and over and over about 'words' about 'censorship' (why I have a right to use any word I please, it's my god given right in some amendment, god dammit! and you don't like it there's something wrong with YOU.) about if you didn't talk back then maybe we wouldn't be so aggravating.

WTF!

Seriously.

[hlthe2b]

93. I keep trying to think of a way to produce an eloquent response in ATA (or elsewhere)

that will result in those who "don't get it" (as opposed to those who "won't get it&quot to finally see the light.


Thus far, I'm flailing. My best to those who have been doing so. I salute you all for those efforts.



(LOL--- OMG, just as I am typing this, CBS broke in to say "white smoke" billowing.... How I wish that meant something positive for the women of the world, but I have a hard time imagining it so)

[DURHAM D]

95. Those who "don't get it" and "won't get it" are one and the same to me.

It is the 21st century afterall... The information is out there and they could easily educate themselves. They have chosen not to. So if they cling to mid-last-century ideas it is because it simply serves their self-interest.

I admit that because I am old and have been having/hearing the same conversation for almost 50 years (as an adult) I find the men/boys just boring and the women in denial just a silly irritant.

otoh - IRL If someone really wants to learn I am right there and have two family members in their 30s who have recently gone from not noticing the sexism to smart feminists in a matter of months. The war on reproductive rights got their attention and we just started talking. It is motivated by the fact they both are raising young daughters. They send me links to articles all of the time so I can follow along with their journey of enlightenment. I did warn them early on that once the light is on there is no going back.

I do appreciate the efforts of all those here who continue to wade in and fight the fight and hope they don't arrive where I am twenty, thirty, forty years from now and think - "Oh look, it is the same old talking points from the same old well of deliberate ignorance".

[redqueen]

96. Thanks for this post.

I really needed to hear that. I get really tired of the 'educate me' and 'prove it' stuff, from adults, who are asking to be spoon-fed information that is far from new as they are typing on the internet, a mere two or three clicks from Google.

[seabeyond]

94. "We don't raise boys to be men. We raise them not to be women, or gay men."

this is what we fight today. this is in an article ism just posted, i have yet to read. http://www.democraticunderground.com/125517548

this is what we see on du. that so many women adn so many men have recognized for a while now. that so many others so want to shut us down about.

this is where the issue is. a dn as the stories escalate there is no way, no how that those voicing to do nothing can deny the very real problems our boys and men have today that drastically are effecting our girls and women.